*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Round Earthers and eclipses - Moderation Question
« on: October 11, 2020, 05:31:54 PM »
Since the rules state we are not to discuss moderation in the topic that is being moderated, as well as a moderator telling me to stop, I am bringing the issue here, as it's been mentioned before that this is the place to voice moderation issues. Hopefully this post isn't breaking any rules, but this is the correct form to post this as I understand it.

I am unable to understand what Pete's concern here is. Please excuse the length and all the quotes, but I want to be clear about who said what, and my previous attempts in that thread was not met with any success, and I can see that the warnings are continuing in that thread.

The latest warning to the two of us was this.

I addressed a very specific scenario - the GIF featuring the Sun. I was informed that I was wrong in my claims. When I inquired why, I was presented with a bunch of arguments about cars and street lights. If you don't see how that's changing the topic, I can't help you.

I can, however, point out that this kind of petty trolling is extremely common for you two, and I can assure you that it will not continue. If you can't post on topic, don't post.

Here is the first warning I got.

When did I say you can see cars on the Sun?
Well, let's see. As always, context is key. I don't trust you to get it right, so I'll spell it out and provide links. My post quotes a post of yours, which in turn quotes a post by Tom.

An abbreviated timeline of posts is here.

Tom posted several images of streetlights and car headlights.


I posted a comment about lens flare, glare and camera settings.

Tom replied to my post and posted about polarized lenses and glare.


I then took and posted this image of a flood light.


Tom then posted this gif of the sun and contrast settings.


I  then replied discussing camera settings and the photo I took of the floodlamp.

This is where Pete entered the discussion with this.

This is easy to see for yourself. Load my sample image into Photoshop or Paint and try and use contrast and brightness to make either side look like that other.  You can't because it is NOT THE SAME as a cameras exposure settings.
Well, yes, you'd probably want to use Lightroom's exposure setting to more accurately mimic a real camera's exposure.

I want to point out that he quoted me talking about my picture of the floodlamp. He did not mention the Sun anywhere in his message. He did not mention the Sun gif and if you look at the time line, the Sun gif was introduced well after the car headlights and streetlamps were being discussed at length.

To continue, I replied to Pete, and once again mentioned my picture and suggesting contrast experiments with it.

This is easy to see for yourself. Load my sample image into Photoshop or Paint and try and use contrast and brightness to make either side look like that other.  You can't because it is NOT THE SAME as a cameras exposure settings.
Well, yes, you'd probably want to use Lightroom's exposure setting to more accurately mimic a real camera's exposure.

Lightroom won't work either, you are welcome to try it for yourself.  It's not a matter of what program you use or how good it is at modeling a camera, a whiteout means the cameras sensor maxed out and there simply is no data to recover.

I really suggest trying with my sample image.  You won't be able to extract the shape of the light from the over exposed image, and you can't make a matching white circle from the correctly exposed image.

I then took some time to take an post this image because I was unahappy with the quality of my first and wanted to match Tom's first photo better.


This is Pete's next post.  You can see above the section he quoted from me was immediately followed by "I really suggest trying with my sample image." making it clear what picture I'm talking about.

a whiteout means the cameras sensor maxed out and there simply is no data to recover.
The image Tom presented clearly doesn't exhibit whiteout throughout.

I replied to him with this. I included a cropped section of photo I was discussing as a reference.

a whiteout means the cameras sensor maxed out and there simply is no data to recover.
The image Tom presented clearly doesn't exhibit whiteout throughout.

I never said it did.  The car headlights and the streetlights are whited out as can easily be seen, those parts of the image are overexposed, just as I stated.

Which is the point, you can't measure overexposed lights and assume that's how big the actual lights are.  His photos are not showing lights that don't obey the laws of perspective, they simply have overexposed light sources in them.



Pete mentions "The image Tom presented" which doesn't specify which one.  In the next reply is where Pete first mentions the Sun.  In every post I made, I clearly indicated what photo I was discussing. This is the first time Pete mentioned the Sun.

The car headlights and the streetlights are whited out as can easily be seen, those parts of the image are overexposed, just as I stated.
You know, claiming to be able to see cars and streetlights on the Sun's surface might just be a new low for you.

Now, I understand that with long multi-page topics it can be confusing what particular point is being discussed, which is why I try to avoid snipping out single sentences and often include more of the previous post than is strictly needed.

I do not see the reason for the warnings given here.  I was very clear in what I was discussing. The car and streetlight subject was brought up by Tom first and is clearly on the topic of light sources and how they are seen. 

But I wanted to get some feedback here, where did I ever claim you could see cars on the Sun? Pete later mentions that if you follow the comment chain back you get to one with that Sun gif in it, but look at more of the posts and you see the streetlight images and discussions both before and after that Sun picture. And I mentioned my pictures and Toms street light pictures in all of those other messages.

I just don't see the justification for the warnings to stop posting and the accusations of trolling here.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11959
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Round Earthers and eclipses - Moderation Question
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2020, 06:29:18 PM »
No, sorry, we're not having another "feedback" thread about how you totally, absolutely didn't do anything wrong, and how poor and innocent you are. You're welcome to PM Parsifal/xasop if you feel you're being wronged, but I am well and truly done with you trying to start lynch mobs every time you don't like something that's happened on this website.

If you find it difficult to stay on topic without people quoting the whole thread back at you every time (something the rules explicitly discourage, by the way - we have high expectations of our users' ability to read), then this place honestly isn't for you.

Thread locked.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2020, 06:32:02 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Question on Moderation
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2020, 07:53:23 AM »
Surely the point of this section is to offer suggestions to improve this place or to express concerns about things, including moderation decisions.
I'm concerned that this thread has been locked:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17074.0

I'm more concerned by who replied and locked it. The thread was about a warning Pete made in a thread.
JSS rightly made a thread here and went through why the warning was unwarranted in some detail.
...and then Pete replied and locked the thread, shutting down all further discussion.
Pete locking a thread which is about a moderation decision he made surely isn't on.

Fine, he offered the alternative of JSS PMing someone, but I don't see why JSS should have to do that when creating a thread here was already the right thing to do.

And, for the record, I agree with JSS in that thread - the warning in the original thread was unwarranted
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2375
    • View Profile
Re: Question on Moderation
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2020, 10:51:37 AM »
Surely the point of this section is to offer suggestions to improve this place or to express concerns about things, including moderation decisions.
I'm concerned that this thread has been locked:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17074.0

I'm more concerned by who replied and locked it. The thread was about a warning Pete made in a thread.
JSS rightly made a thread here and went through why the warning was unwarranted in some detail.
...and then Pete replied and locked the thread, shutting down all further discussion.
Pete locking a thread which is about a moderation decision he made surely isn't on.

Fine, he offered the alternative of JSS PMing someone, but I don't see why JSS should have to do that when creating a thread here was already the right thing to do.

And, for the record, I agree with JSS in that thread - the warning in the original thread was unwarranted

I concur.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11959
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Question on Moderation
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2020, 06:32:02 PM »
I'm more concerned by who replied and locked it. The thread was about a warning Pete made in a thread.
JSS rightly made a thread here and went through why the warning was unwarranted in some detail.
There is no doubt in our minds that JSS was not sincere in raising his thread - he and a few others here noticed that you can easily stir up forum drama by launching an S&C thread. He has a clear track record of doing that in the past, and he's been told that his cheap trolling won't be tolerated. On the off-chance that the moderators' judgement is incorrect, he has a perfectly valid alternative of raising his concern that doesn't involve starting a lynch mob thread.

Starting a follow-up lynch mob thread, by the way, is not the solution*. PM-ing the admin is. I'll refer you to our recent conversation - doing exactly what the mod just asked you to stop doing is unlikely to help reach a resolution, even if you think you're a super-champion of justice.

Consequently, the threads are getting merged, and the resulting thread remains locked.

* - Look, Thork already hopped on it with his rambling. It won't be too long until he starts drunkenly sending me abusive messages again. So, thanks for that.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2020, 06:44:03 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice